Implementing a routine flow cytometry assay for nucleated red blood cell counts in cord blood units
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: As required by standards organizations, Héma-Québec Cord Blood Bank performs enumeration of nucleated red blood cells (NRBCs) in cord blood units (CBUs). This study presents the validation and implementation approaches developed to transfer the routine NRBC enumeration from the manual blood film method to a flow cytometric assay. METHODS: The flow cytometry method was adapted from Tsuji (Cytometry, 37, 1999, 291). This assay was validated to assess the specificity, detection limit, repeatability, and reproducibility of the method, including interoperator and interlaboratory testing. Finally, postimplementation follow-up and adjustments were performed for CBU over a 7-month period. RESULTS: Blood film and flow cytometry NRBC enumerations showed a strong correlation (n = 40; Pearson's r correlation = 0.90). Validation was successful as exemplified by the correlation in interlaboratory testing (n = 30; r = 0.98). During implementation, our routine laboratory analyses revealed that CBU with low NRBC content (≤2%), representing 26% of all CBU tested, resulted in 15% of repeated reading and/or staining and was the principal source of nonconformity. Small adjustments in the standard operating procedures (SOPs), including a fixed 200-event setting in the NRBC gate for the second reading of the replicates, have completely solved this issue. CONCLUSION: Flow cytometric NRBC enumerations, now implemented in Héma-Québec Public Cord Blood Bank, is an improvement in the efficiency of our operations by integrating the count for NRBC into our flow cytometry platform.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".